I've been watching alot of the Rockets and Warrior games. Stephen Curry and James Harden are beasts! James Harden is probably the most intelligent basketball player that I've ever seen. Stephen Curry can shoot the three very well, also.

I saw the most recent one, I think it was last Thursday or Friday's game.

Man, the Warriors did everything they could to lose that game. When you have a two point lead with less than a minute, you drive to the basket and take time off the clock- you DONT just heave it at the backboard from half-court! They did that TWICE in the final minute when they should have iced the game by dribbing/passing it down for an easy inside shot to wind the clock down. It's a low percentage shot- great if you make it but otherwise, you are basically giving away the ball. You just shouldnt do that when you are protecting a narrow lead at the end of the game.

And besides that (1) the Warriors last shot shouln't have counted since Durrant was out of bounds. and 2) this years Warriors team isn't as good as past years, for some odd reason- they have mostly the same line-up, but often, it seems like they just can't seem to get it done. Not sure why- internal team strife? Undisclosed nagging injuries? Durrant just seems "off" and a lot of the team's key players, especially Thompson, seem mired in long term shooting slumps. Who knows whats going on.

It was a fun weekend in the NFL. New England, Kansas City, and the Rams all looked great and the Saints handled some early adversity very well in their win over the Eagles. I'm really nervous about Kansas City considering how good they looked against the Colts, but I'm excited for both match-ups next week. All season it seemed inevitable that these would be the last 4 teams alive and all of the possible Super Bowl match-ups are enticing.

It was a fun weekend in the NFL. New England, Kansas City, and the Rams all looked great and the Saints handled some early adversity very well in their win over the Eagles. I'm really nervous about Kansas City considering how good they looked against the Colts, but I'm excited for both match-ups next week. All season it seemed inevitable that these would be the last 4 teams alive and all of the possible Super Bowl match-ups are enticing.

I thought last weekend was a better weekend for football. The first 3 games of this weekend were basically blowouts where the other team had no chance. Saints v Eagles was a great game, however. 1&2 seeds from both NFC and AFC made it in which is interesting. Being a Dolphins fan...Go Chiefs!

_________________Catching up on the classic's that I missed out on because my parents didn't want to ruin their lives sooner.

Chiefs-Colts went about as I expected, but he rest were all surprising in one way or another. That was the best I've seen the Pats all year. If that NE shows up, Arrowhead or not they'll go to another SB. I think that's less likely, so I'm tilting towards the Chiefs. The Rams and Saints won, but I was not terribly impressed with either team's performance. The Saints finally brushed aside Foles Magic and mostly got it together, but I watched that Rams game thinking that a good team would beat them. As strong as the Rams were through the middle of the season, they appear to have softened, so I think the Saints should win. Both games ought be competitive though.

All the games were predictable compared to last week and not particularly close. At this point I'm rooting for the Rams or the Chiefs, just because the other two teams have both seen Superbowls in recent years.

Of course, I always love to see Tom Brady lose a Superbowl.

_________________

MorbidBlood wrote:

So the winner is Destruction and Infernal Overkill is the motherfucking skullcrushing poserkilling satan-worshiping 666 FUCK YOU greatest german thrash record.

If you had asked me earlier in the season, I'd have said Rams, by a mile. But now- I'm not so sure. As mentioned, they are not as formidable at this point in the season as they were earlier in the season. So that should be interesting. I kinda like the Rams but I dunno, I have a feeling it's gonna be the Saints.

I typically root for the Patriots but I kinda thought San Diego would beat them, just because this year's Patriots team isn't as good as past years. So, for next week, the Cheifs should beat them, because... wel, this year's Patriots team isn't as good as past years. I dunno, Brady sometimes saves his best ball for the post season, so you never know, but how much does he have left in the tank? Even if they make it in to the Super Bowl past the Chiefs, both NFC teams are better than the Pats this year.

Chiefs by at least two scores. The Patriots' most consistent defensive threat has been shutting down the run, but the Chiefs ain't a running team. One of the top pass offenses in the NFL up against a bottom third pass defense in the Pats? Forget it. Expect a shootout with better clock management so it doesn't go down to the wire like last time, and Mr. Tom "But I'm Supposed To Win!" Brady weeping bitter little tears of entitlement over on the sidelines.

But the Chargers are also much more of a pass offense and they couldn't get anything going against the Pats. Half of Rivers' yards were in garbage time at the end of the game. The Pats have had a bottom third pass defense for the past 10 years and that hasn't stopped them from having success. Teams with great defenses have always given the Pats more trouble than teams with great offenses. I still agree that the Chiefs are the favorite, but that is mostly because they are playing at home. And lol @ that last sentence. Don't worry, he'll retire soon and you can pick a new player to hate.

Regarding the comment above about the NFC teams, I think both AFC teams are better this year. Around week 8 I would have said otherwise, but as of recent the Rams and Saints have shown a lot more weakness than their AFC counterparts. Whoever comes out of the AFC should be at least 3-point favorites in the Super Bowl.

Sports analysts are still trying to figure out what happened to the Chargers. During the regular season they didn't have the greatest pass defense, but they weren't that bad. The Patriots put up decent numbers in the air, but they weren't that good. It was just the perfect storm of one team having a good day and another having a bad day.

Both Rivers and Brady are incredibly talented. Both are also huge crybabies. In this case Rivers got rattled early and started throwing a tantrum, while Brady got his way and threw for a billion yards, but both quarterbacks have had both types of games throughout their careers. Shit, the Patriots only scored 10 points just a few weeks ago in their loss against the Steelers, who lost a bad game to the Chargers themselves before that.

_________________

MorbidBlood wrote:

So the winner is Destruction and Infernal Overkill is the motherfucking skullcrushing poserkilling satan-worshiping 666 FUCK YOU greatest german thrash record.

The NFC championship game saw one of the worst officiating travesties in the history of the NFL. Literally everyone in the world saw that pass interference, except the referee. There were people asleep in third world countries, on the other side of the planet, that awoke from uneasy dreams about pass interference. That's how obvious it was. The NFL later admitted it. Hell, even the defender admitted it.

The AFC championship game saw the Kansas City Chiefs in rare form. That is, not a form capable of winning. They should never have been in a position to have to fight it out in overtime. But again, let's talk about the officiating. Should that muffed punt have gone NE's way? Absolutely not. The ruling on the field was a KC touchdown, and there is supposed to be conclusive evidence to overturn that kind of call. It was not conclusive. It was iffy at best. And let's also not forget that lightly batting Brady's arm is now called "roughing the passer". Swatting Patrick Mahomes directly in the face is apparently ok though. Fucking please.

So now we have the completely wrong Superbowl. Rams vs Patriots. Yawn. I don't even care.

I still can't believe that no-call. Not only was he not playing the ball, but he went at him helmet-to-helmet with no real effort to avoid doing so, and it was all obvious in real-time. You didn't need replay, it was clear as day. The Chiefs-Patriots rematch played out pretty similarly to the first game except it was Brady throwing picks. Reid probably should have called a timeout to give his defense a breather and regroup, but I doubt it would have helped. They were outmatched, and the pass rush barely phased TB. As for the Superbowl, I think at this point, I would slightly favor the Patriots, as their back-to-back performances impressed me more than the Rams winning a sloppy game over the Cowboys and lucking out against the Saints. This Superbowl will be one of those championship games that I'm not actually that interested in watching. I dislike both the Patriots and the Rams, and I don't think I really care who wins. I may still watch it for lack of anything better to do, but I don't know. Oh well, maybe next year will be better.

I want to say today was a great day for football, with both games going into overtime for the first time ever. However, I can't. I'm a Saints fan and this is garbage. I was rooting for the Chiefs to see something different in the SuperBowl and wow. I'm probably not going to watch the "biggest game of the year." Yawn.

I have no loyalty to either NFC team but you are right- the Saints got robbed. End of story. Even diehard Rams fans (like Sloth) should feel guilty about their team being in the Super Bowl because the officials handed them the victory. I wish there was a way for the NFL to overturn the results but that would just cause even more of a controversy. The Patriots punt return was an iffy call that could have gone either way, and to be fair the chiefs scored a defensive TD not long afterwards anyway.

The thing is, blown calls happen. Anyone who's been a fan for long enough has had their team be on the losing side of a blown call or two. Shit, a few seasons ago, the Steelers lost a spot in the playoffs because of a blown call in a game they weren't even playing. This year, the refs missed an offsides call against the Chargers on a play in which they scored a TD, which ended up being enough to decide the game. And the Steelers missed a spot in the playoffs by exactly one game. The way I've come to look at it is, refs are always going to miss or mess up a certain percentage of calls, and it sucks, but at this point it's as much a part of the game as the weather. If you put yourself in a position where the whole season is down to a dice roll on whether or not the refs see some shit, then you shouldn't have let that much ride on that one roll.

At the same time, it is total bullshit and I sympathize. They are talking about making greater use of replays in making calls like that, or making up for missed calls, which I think would be way more fair for everyone. In light of big fuckups like this, I don't think anyone would begrudge small delays to lessen the chances of this happening again.

_________________

MorbidBlood wrote:

So the winner is Destruction and Infernal Overkill is the motherfucking skullcrushing poserkilling satan-worshiping 666 FUCK YOU greatest german thrash record.

I have no loyalty to either NFC team but you are right- the Saints got robbed. End of story. Even diehard Rams fans (like Sloth) should feel guilty about their team being in the Super Bowl because the officials handed them the victory...

I REALLY hate this position. There was NOTHING guaranteed about the outcome of the game from that play. Yes, it is true that it SHOULD HAVE been called a DPI but even if that had happened, the game was not over. The ball was snapped with 1:51 left so a first down by any means would have seemingly iced the game but are we to believe that the Saints would not screw it up possibly?What if their kicker missed the field goal? Remember Wild Card weekend between the Seahawks and Vikings three years back? Blair Walsh missed a chip shot 27 yard game winner and he had been 3-3 in the game, responsible for ALL of the Vikings points. NOTHING in for sure and lest we not forget that Sean Payton called two PASSING plays despite knowing the team needed to just run the clock down. Both passes were incomplete, which stopped the clock and allowed the Rams to still have a timeout thereafter.- If we can all accept that the game was not for sure over, the question does have to be asked then, why could the Saints suddenly not play good defense on the last drive? They are at home and only 90+ seconds away from the Superbowl.

I will never argue over whether that was a DPI, it was and will be forever and beyond but claiming the lack of the call was handing the Rams victory is ignorant.

GTog wrote:

The NFC championship game saw one of the worst officiating travesties in the history of the NFL. Literally everyone in the world saw that pass interference, except the referee. There were people asleep in third world countries, on the other side of the planet, that awoke from uneasy dreams about pass interference. That's how obvious it was. The NFL later admitted it. Hell, even the defender admitted it.

What made the issue even worse was the obvious helmet to helmet contact on the play. No doubt a missed call.

GTog wrote:

The AFC championship game saw the Kansas City Chiefs in rare form. That is, not a form capable of winning. They should never have been in a position to have to fight it out in overtime. But again, let's talk about the officiating. Should that muffed punt have gone NE's way? Absolutely not.

Which is false. First, the reason Kansas City lost was inexperience and the Patriots being better in every way for 65 minutes. Second, officiating took a beating for blowing the whistle during the very last regular season game this year, costing the Browns a touchdown; on top of them blowing the whistle early during last seasons AFC Championship game, costing the Jaguars a touchdown. The point? Refs are supposed to let the play unfold, they did that and had to call what they saw, which appeared to be like any other muffed punt. In regular time it did appear to hit Julian Edleman.

GTog wrote:

The ruling on the field was a KC touchdown, and there is supposed to be conclusive evidence to overturn that kind of call. It was not conclusive. It was iffy at best.

It was actually not iffy at all. It was revealed during the broadcast that the thumb of both hands appear to touch the ball but from the exact opposite angle, neither thumb (or any other portion) touched the ball. The conclusive evidence was shown on live TV. Must be another case of bias.

GTog wrote:

And let's also not forget that lightly batting Brady's arm is now called "roughing the passer". Swatting Patrick Mahomes directly in the face is apparently ok though. Fucking please.

I concede that the roughing the passer call against Brady was weak but it is shameful you would need to resort to claiming he only hit Brady's arm. Film does not lie and anyone, even people asleep in third world countries, on the other side of the planet, that awoke from uneasy dreams" could see Brady's head go downwards from the impact. It was clearly NOT roughing the passer but to lie and claim it was only the arm makes your point sound incredibly whiny.

Won’t happen. Later in that same section of the rule book;“The Commissioner will not apply authority in cases of complaints by clubs concerning judgmental errors or routine errors of omission by game officials. “Sorry Saints, it’s done.

_________________

darkeningday wrote:

Some of us watch Star Wars movies to watch lightsabers touch other lightstabers.

I have no loyalty to either NFC team but you are right- the Saints got robbed. End of story. Even diehard Rams fans (like Sloth) should feel guilty about their team being in the Super Bowl because the officials handed them the victory...

I REALLY hate this position. There was NOTHING guaranteed about the outcome of the game from that play. Yes, it is true that it SHOULD HAVE been called a DPI but even if that had happened, the game was not over. The ball was snapped with 1:51 left so a first down by any means would have seemingly iced the game but are we to believe that the Saints would not screw it up possibly?What if their kicker missed the field goal? Remember Wild Card weekend between the Seahawks and Vikings three years back? Blair Walsh missed a chip shot 27 yard game winner and he had been 3-3 in the game, responsible for ALL of the Vikings points. NOTHING in for sure and lest we not forget that Sean Payton called two PASSING plays despite knowing the team needed to just run the clock down. Both passes were incomplete, which stopped the clock and allowed the Rams to still have a timeout thereafter.- If we can all accept that the game was not for sure over, the question does have to be asked then, why could the Saints suddenly not play good defense on the last drive? They are at home and only 90+ seconds away from the Superbowl.

This wasn't aimed at me, but yes, they could they have botched it. Would they have, almost certainly not. Another factor is the time. You mention it, but you don't seem to see how that would have played out. Even if they were kept out of the endzone, that would eat clock or force McVay to spend timeouts. The field-goal and kick would have been in the last few seconds, or with a little more time but with no timeouts. Effectively, it would have been game.

Chiefs-Patriots was mostly fair. That call on the punt could have gone either way, and while I've never cared for how the NFL handles overtime, that's the way it has been for years, and it could have just as easily been Mahomes marching downfield.

^Used to be the way, in the NFL. First score won. It was changed because nobody ever bothered to do more than get into field goal range. Now it's first touchdown wins, which is precisely the halfway point between stupid and reasonable. The rule should be that each team gets one try to score, no matter what. That's what hockey does with the shootout.

And you half-ass apologists can just stop it with your shitty "but the game was not necessarily over!" nonsense. The Saints had a top red zone offense. Only Pittsburgh was consistently better, both home and away. At the 6 yard line, with a full set of downs, a touchdown was a virtual guarantee. Could the Rams have gotten it all the way back, with probably 1:45 or so left on the clock, and tied it anyway? Considering that all season an average scoring drive took them over 3 minutes, probably not.

The AFC championship game saw the Kansas City Chiefs in rare form. That is, not a form capable of winning. They should never have been in a position to have to fight it out in overtime. But again, let's talk about the officiating. Should that muffed punt have gone NE's way? Absolutely not. The ruling on the field was a KC touchdown, and there is supposed to be conclusive evidence to overturn that kind of call. It was not conclusive. It was iffy at best. And let's also not forget that lightly batting Brady's arm is now called "roughing the passer". Swatting Patrick Mahomes directly in the face is apparently ok though. Fucking please.

This was already addressed, but I feel like I should reiterate, that with all of the camera angles combined, there was definitive evidence that the ball did not touch Edelman on the punt return. But the thing is, it doesn't even matter. Two plays later KC picked the ball off and ran it back 3 yards ahead of where they would have had the ball if the ruling on the field had stood with regard to the muffed punt. And a KC touchdown was never in question, because you cannot return a muffed punt for a touchdown... And they scored a TD after the interception anyway, so the call on the muffed punt did not help the Patriots whatsoever.

The roughing the passer play on Brady was a bad call. Probably the only bad penalty flag in the Patriot's favor on Sunday. The refs consistently missed pass interferences (also holding and illegal contact penalties) during the game and Romo even commented that the Chiefs had been getting away with them all game. JC Jackson was getting called for shit that Kendall Fuller was doing throughout the game. In no way shape or form did the outcome of this game come down to poor officiating. The Patriots outplayed the Chiefs.

For the NFC Championship, I completely agree about the blown call, but the Saints should have never even been in that position to begin with. They had some of the weirdest third down calls I have ever seen in the first quarter that forced them to settle for field goals instead of touchdowns and they just seemed to have such a lack of energy the whole game. And then they get the ball in overtime and turn it over. There were so many plays they should have made that I don't even feel bad for them. Definitely did not look like a team that should be going to the Super Bowl and I think if anything this weekend supported my claim that the two AFC teams are clearly better than the NFC teams.

I have no loyalty to either NFC team but you are right- the Saints got robbed. End of story. Even diehard Rams fans (like Sloth) should feel guilty about their team being in the Super Bowl because the officials handed them the victory...

I REALLY hate this position. There was NOTHING guaranteed about the outcome of the game from that play. Yes, it is true that it SHOULD HAVE been called a DPI but even if that had happened, the game was not over. The ball was snapped with 1:51 left so a first down by any means would have seemingly iced the game but are we to believe that the Saints would not screw it up possibly?What if their kicker missed the field goal? Remember Wild Card weekend between the Seahawks and Vikings three years back? Blair Walsh missed a chip shot 27 yard game winner and he had been 3-3 in the game, responsible for ALL of the Vikings points. NOTHING in for sure and lest we not forget that Sean Payton called two PASSING plays despite knowing the team needed to just run the clock down. Both passes were incomplete, which stopped the clock and allowed the Rams to still have a timeout thereafter.- If we can all accept that the game was not for sure over, the question does have to be asked then, why could the Saints suddenly not play good defense on the last drive? They are at home and only 90+ seconds away from the Superbowl.

This wasn't aimed at me, but yes, they could they have botched it. Would they have, almost certainly not.

You do not know that, consider what they did coming out of the 2 minute warning.1st down began with 1:58, incomplete pass. Why is Brees throwing? 1:55 left now and the Rams still have 2 timeouts.2nd down Saints run it for nothing and the Rams call a timeout.3rd down - the play with the non-call - began at 1:49 and was another throw. Why again is Brees throwing?He should know the Rams have another timeout, right?

If 1st down had at least been a run the 3rd down pass could be justified since the Rams would have been out of timeouts by then. Sean Payton's play-calling is at fault here.

StainedClass95 wrote:

Another factor is the time. You mention it, but you don't seem to see how that would have played out. Even if they were kept out of the endzone, that would eat clock or force McVay to spend timeouts. The field-goal and kick would have been in the last few seconds, or with a little more time but with no timeouts. Effectively, it would have been game.

Which is, effectively, what I wrote above. You are failing to account for one major detail. Call or no call, there was still a game to be played. Why was Payton losing his mind as a coach on the sidelines instead of leading his team for the task at hand? Should it have been a DPI? No question but what should have - or could have - happened is separate from DID happen. Once it became clear that a call was not going to happen, it should have been onto the next play. We should be questioning Payton's coaching here.

Another MAJOR detail you are failing to account for is why the Saints returned to the brown paper bag 1980 Aints on defense? Seriously, the Aints defense folded like a tent once that non call happened. I say the Aints lost because the Rams beat them and I have one more reason, which is made all the more obvious by the bold part of your own words.

StainedClass95 wrote:

Chiefs-Patriots was mostly fair. That call on the punt could have gone either way, and while I've never cared for how the NFL handles overtime, that's the way it has been for years, and it could have just as easily been Mahomes marching downfield.

Could not agree more. You knew once NE won the coin toss Brady was scoring a TD without the Chiefs getting a chance. Right?

Be honest though, did you not think that exact same thing when NO won the overtime coin toss and Brees himself said he wanted the ball? It was also inexcusable for a veteran like Brees to throw that INT in that situation.

I hate to be outside the pity party for the Saints because while they were 100% robbed of a call and, almost, guaranteed victory, they lost because they failed to finish the game. Saints fans should just get over it.

Luvers666: That play-calling was fine. There's no reason to only run when you aren't at the goal-line, especially when Kamara/Ingram hadn't been lighting it up. Had he gotten the 1st and Goal off DPI, Payton would have likely moved more towards the run-game and eating the clock. Again, they didn't even need to get into the endzone, eating the clock would have been enough to get 3 with nearly no time left.

On to the next play? That was 3rd down in a tied game, now 4th down, and they had to settle for a FG with time on the clock. Any coach would have been livid. Hell, Philip Rivers acts out more for less. Should the Saints have been able to hold them, probably, but it wasn't that egregious given that all they did was let-up a long FG. It wasn't nearly as bad as the Chiefs completely folding against Brady. And again, the Saints should not have had to.

As to comparing the overtimes, those two games were pretty different. Brees throwing a pick was bad, but that game was not as high-scoring, so it was more uncertain. Realistically, whoever got the ball in that Patriots-Chiefs overtime first was probably going to win. Mahomes was rolling and BB's best shot if the Chiefs won the toss would have been to force a turnover. Saints-Rams was a less-effective game on offense with a lot of missed opportunities.

I think I get what you are trying to say. The Saints weren't perfect. They should have been up 21-0 in the first quarter when they were forcing turnovers but had to settle for field goals. The Rams themselves played a good game and should be commended for the season that they have had so far, but that does not change the fact that the Rams advanced in large part off an egregious miss. I have a friend who's an old Raiders fan saying it was worse than the Tuck Rule, that bad. No one is acting unsportsmanlike, we are just acknowledging that that particular win was not as clean as anyone would like in a major game.

Even though this was meant as a shot at my statement and is barely worth even quoting, I will still respond. No, I do not make friends very well, in fact I have virtually no friends as a result. I was not trying to make friends though, just discussing football.

StainedClass95 wrote:

Luvers666: That play-calling was fine.

Then you must not watch very much football. The game of football is all about whatever situation you are in, therefore understanding the situation is as important as any player on the field.

StainedClass95 wrote:

There's no reason to only run when you aren't at the goal-line, especially when Kamara/Ingram hadn't been lighting it up. Had he gotten the 1st and Goal off DPI, Payton would have likely moved more towards the run-game and eating the clock. Again, they didn't even need to get into the endzone, eating the clock would have been enough to get 3 with nearly no time left.

This part shows what I am writing about, EVERY single thing about this is wrong. The Saints had an excellent offensive play right at the 2 minute warning, a 47 yard pass from Brees to Ginn Jr. that put the ball at the Rams 12 yard line. Coming out of the 2 minute warning, EVERY single team from EVERY single era with EVERY single QB and against EVERY and ANY defense would proceed to run the ball. ONLY!!!

To the point you are trying desperately to make is making you miss the actual point here, that being the Saints should have been all run from the onset of that 2 minute warning. Analyze it.- 1st down, a run from the 12 yard line would have eaten up a few seconds and forced the Rams to use their first timeout. You can literally hear Joe Buck say during the broadcast, "Quick throw and that will help the Rams cause that is incomplete."- 2nd down they did run it but it was the dumbest kind of run, a pitch several yards back that has Kamara barely get back to the line. The ONLY smart thing about the play-call is it DID force the Rams to use one of their timeouts. Imagine if they had ran on 1st down and when 3rd down started the Saints knew the Rams were out of timeouts. If the Saints ran the ball AGAIN on 3rd down the Rams would not have been able to stop the clock again.- 3rd down started at 1:49 so if another run was called - and assuming another no gain happened - there would be approximately 1:02 left during the subsequent kickoff. If 1st down had been a run, there would have likely been only 0:24 left on the clock instead.

My point is conventional gridiron wisdom is that the Saints were getting too cute and arrogant with their play-calling and hurt themselves plenty by going against that conventional wisdom. RUN THE FOOTBALL. Ask the Seattle Seahawks how important it is to RUN the ball when conventional wisdom says to do so. They lost a SB and ended a potential dynasty by throwing instead of running when conventional wisdom said RUN the ball 100% of the time.

StainedClass95 wrote:

On to the next play? That was 3rd down in a tied game, now 4th down, and they had to settle for a FG with time on the clock. Any coach would have been livid. Hell, Philip Rivers acts out more for less. Should the Saints have been able to hold them, probably, but it wasn't that egregious given that all they did was let-up a long FG. It wasn't nearly as bad as the Chiefs completely folding against Brady. And again, the Saints should not have had to.

Any coach would have been livid, sure. During the game I was livid, I asked no one in particular what in the hell the officials were seeing. However neither of us are the head coach and sometimes the head coach has to reel in the anger and accept fate as it is. You keep going back to what SHOULD HAVE been, which I agree with completely, but as I wrote before, what should have or could have happened are different than what did happen.

Being a coach requires you to be a leader of men, the ability to lead by example. Maybe the reason the Saints imploded was because their coach lost his mind and acted more childish then responsible. Being upset is one thing, acting like a baby who has shit themselves is an entirely other ting.

StainedClass95 wrote:

As to comparing the overtimes, those two games were pretty different. Brees throwing a pick was bad, but that game was not as high-scoring, so it was more uncertain. Realistically, whoever got the ball in that Patriots-Chiefs overtime first was probably going to win. Mahomes was rolling and BB's best shot if the Chiefs won the toss would have been to force a turnover. Saints-Rams was a less-effective game on offense with a lot of missed opportunities.

Which completely missed the point, geez. Are you deliberately trying to miss the point?

My point was everyone thought that when the Saints won the toss Brees was going to right the wrong and score a TD. That Goff and co. would NEVER get a chance to see the ball again. I guarantee you none of this argument would exist had the Saints survived the no-call and won the game in overtime.

Everyone watching the game collectively said when NE won the overtime coin toss, "Patriots are going to score a TD and win this!"Everyone watching the game collectively (would have) said (if) KC won the overtime coin toss, "Chiefs are going to score a TD and win this!"Everyone watching the game collectively said when NO won the overtime coin toss, "Saints are going to score a TD and win this!

StainedClass95 wrote:

The Saints weren't perfect. They should have been up 21-0 in the first quarter when they were forcing turnovers but had to settle for field goals.

And you do not believe that was the result of the Rams playing great D, considering the spot they were put in? The Saints were not perfect cause the Rams D made life difficult for them.

StainedClass95 wrote:

The Rams themselves played a good game and should be commended for the season that they have had so far, but that does not change the fact that the Rams advanced in large part off an egregious miss. I have a friend who's an old Raiders fan saying it was worse than the Tuck Rule, that bad.

The Tuck Rule was not a "bad call" as much as it was a stupid rule, however I was avoiding bringing that play up since no Raiders fan ever wants to mention the subsequent plays. Sure the Patriots may have benefited from that call but why did the Raiders fold up like tents when they needed to flex their muscles the most? Why did they allow Brady and co. to tie and then win the game? Likewise, why did the Saints allow the Rams to tie and then win the game? Did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, the Saints are not as good as others were claiming?

StainedClass95 wrote:

No one is acting unsportsmanlike, we are just acknowledging that that particular win was not as clean as anyone would like in a major game.

I never wrote that anyone was acting unsportsmanlike and I have acknowledged that the Saints should have gotten that call.

Ugly and boring punting contest of a game, but yeah- Edelman was the only offensive player from either team who really did anything. I would have been more tempted to give the MVP to a defensive player, if I could think of one in particular who stood out.

Best part of the game was the commercial/NFL promo where a bunch of current and former NFL guys at a big banquet start scrumming around for the loose football that gets knocked off the top of the cake. That was hilarious, and much more fun to watch than the actual game.

I was rooting for New England and was glad they won, for the record. But it admittedly got old just watching guys run into a big pile of dudes for maybe a yard gain, over and over again.

I do like American football but that Super Bowl was one of the most boring sports games I have ever watched in my entire life. That's certainly no good publicity for a sport that is extremely popular in North America but that almost nobody else in the world cares about.

_________________My most recent short story:

''Hanako and the Suicide Forest'': http://kluseba.eklablog.com/hanako-and-the-suicide-forest-a187892062

>Stephen Hillenburg, creator of Spongebob Squarepants, dies in 2018>Many thousands of people sign a petition for "Sweet Victory", a song from an early episode where the Spongebob characters play the halftime show of the "Bubble Bowl", to be played during halftime at the Super Bowl>Maroon 5's set opens with a three second clip hinting that the clip will be played>Instead Maroon 5 just comes out and does their set as initially planned>Cue the next week of children and twentysomethings complaining on social media that the halftime show went along as planned instead of being derailed for a three minute cartoon short because even though Maroon 5 is terrible, they only have 13 minutes to play way more than 13 minutes worth of hit songs and they can't fathom that petitions are worthless and one of the largest yearly events in American pop culture isn't going to bend the knee to a bunch of children who would rather see a joke from a twenty year old cartoon be given as much weight as a multimillion dollar mega-event